3 ms·
With the assumptions that 1) boy/girl is always random but 50/50, and 2) people are choosing to have 1-10 kids ahead of time and going for it (that's how people
by rcar 10y ago
With the assumptions that 1) boy/girl is always random but 50/50, and 2) people are choosing to have 1-10 kids ahead of time and going for it (that's how people plan their families, right?), girls do have very slightly more brothers than boys.
The notebook below shows a simulation of 50k towns of 100 families. It also holds for different max numbers of children and more families.
https://gist.github.com/rcarneva/7baac666bd65f487df73378a90c0d0b3 https://gist.github.com/rcarneva/7baac666bd65f487df73378a90c...
- kbenson 10y ago> that's how people plan their families, right? That's probably how they begin planning them, but plans change. Also, there's likely quite a few unintended births. Or, the alternative reply, if you prefer: You sarcasm is far too understated to do well on a forum like this. ;)
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- waqf 10y agoNice, it took me a while to find the fallacy. (I really hope you did that deliberately, it's masterly.) What you have done is a variant of the observation that within any family the sisters have more brothers than the boys, except that you averaged over 100 families to make the effect more subtle. But if you make the towns larger, the discrepancy will disappear (for example at 100 towns of 50k families I would expect it to be lost in the noise).